It is important to note the difference between "Best of the Public" and "mob rule." Simply allowing the loudest or most numerous voices to prevail is not the same thing as allowing the best of the public to drive achievement. Sites such as [[Wikipedia]] operate on the principle of mob rule, and as a result, are plagued with bias, inaccuracy, and an inability to differentiate between significant insights and trivia.

It is important to note the difference between "Best of the Public" and "mob rule." Simply allowing the loudest or most numerous voices to prevail is not the same thing as allowing the best of the public to drive achievement. Sites such as [[Wikipedia]] operate on the principle of mob rule, and as a result, are plagued with bias, inaccuracy, and an inability to differentiate between significant insights and trivia.

−

One of the most pointed illustrations of this difference is the [[United States]] itself. The [[Founding Fathers]], despite not naming it, applied the "Best of the Public" principle in their attempts to craft a new government. Realizing the danger of mob rule, they rejected a pure democracy in favor of a democratic Republic--a system designed to ensure that, while all of the public would have a voice in their new government, the best of the public would guide that government as elected representatives. In so doing, they clearly affirmed that they believed the best of the public was better than a group of experts; in contrast, the nations of Europe still firmly subscribed to the notion that government should be in the hands of elite "experts" (the ruling families and nobility.)

+

One of the most pointed illustrations of this difference is the [[United States]] itself. The [[Founding Fathers]], despite not naming it, applied the "Best of the Public" principle in their attempts to craft a new government. Realizing the danger of mob rule, they rejected a pure democracy in favor of a democratic Republic--a system designed to ensure that, while all of the public would have a voice in their new government, the best of the public would guide that government. To insure that only the best of the public was selected, with the exception of members of the [[U.S. House of Representatives|House of Representatives]], officials in the federal government were not directly elected. The framers of the [[U.S. Constitution]] conceived of the [[Electoral College]] as a body of men who would exercise independent judgement in choosing the [[President of the United States|President]] and [[Vice President of the United States|Vice President]], not merely cast their ballots as directed by their state's voters. Moreover, electors in most states were initially appointed by state legislatures. Likewise, members of the [[U.S. Senate|Senate]] were originally selected by state legislatures. Judges, ambassadors and other federal officials are chosen by the President and subject to approval by the Senate. Thus, although the people would directly choose their Congressmen, they would only indirectly choose other officials, and this filtering mechanism would ensure that only the best of the public was in charge of the government, rather than having mob rule.

+

+

By choosing this compromise, they clearly affirmed that they believed the best of the public was better than a group of experts; in contrast, the nations of Europe still firmly subscribed to the notion that government should be in the hands of elite "experts" (the ruling families and nobility.)

===Obscurity===

===Obscurity===

Revision as of 00:13, 10 July 2013

The "best of the public" is a successful approach to education, scholarship, and biblical translation that was coined during an interview with Andrew Schlafly, the founder of Conservapedia, that was published on December 3, 2009:[1]

“

The best of the public is better than a group of experts.

”

The concept then became a topic of discussion when Mr. Schlafly appeared on the Colbert Report on December 8, 2009.[2]

In early February 2010, Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas implicitly endorsed the concept of the "best of the public" with this response to a question by a state college student:[3]

“

I think there are smart kids a lot of places. ... [T]here is a bias. If you look at smart bloggers — or self-proclaimed smart bloggers — they referred to my clerks last year as TTT — 'third tier trash.' That's the attitude that you're up against.

”

Another way of expressing this concept is that "extraordinary achievements are attained by ordinary people." The enigmatic Christian term the "Son of Man" embodies how inspiration comes from the ostensibly ordinary rather than the esteemed experts. Most prophets were also ordinary men.

Alexander Hamilton, the most intellectually productive of the Founding Fathers, was abandoned by his father, orphaned by the premature death of his mother, and then orphaned again by the suicide of his adopted father; he was stigmatized due to his social background and excluded from the local British school for it.

the principle of trial by a jury of one's peers

letters to the editor

the design of Vietnam War Memorial (competition won by a college student, featuring ordinary soldiers)

the design of the St. Louis Arch (competition won by an unknown architect, featuring openness)

design of the distinctive Coca-Cola glass bottle, which resulted from a public contest in 1915.

Internet blogs. Anyone can start a blog, and readers read the best blog posts. Such blogs have been responsible for breaking crucial news stories well before the "experts" of the traditional media--for example, the Monica Lewinsky story and Rathergate

Homeschooled students tended to dominate the annual Math Counts competition to such an extent that the competition changed the rules to ban teams of homeschoolers from participating. [4]

In 1939, George Dantzig, a graduate student at Stanford University solved two problems in statistics that were previously considered unsolvable after mistaking them for a homework assignment. Until Dantzig's professor told him what he had done, he was unaware that there was anything special about the problems.[5]

All wikis, such as Conservapedia, are an example of the 'Best of the Public' because their accuracy depends upon the premise thet the public can outdo encyclopedias written by experts.

Moral examples

Lenny Skutnik, the Mississippi native who dove into the icy Potomac River to rescue passengers from the crashed airplane on Jan. 13, 1982.[6]

Political and legal examples

William Penn's approach to colonial Pennsylvania, which even advertised to attract hard-working settlers of all ethnicity and religious beliefs; as a result Philadelphia quickly became the most prosperous and highly populated city in colonial America

Ronald Reagan embraced and embodied the best of the public in his speeches and political philosophy, and personified it by his own political ascendancy outside of the party establishment

the recall of the governor, the attorney general, and another top official in North Dakota in 1921 -- who were corrupt politicians devoted to state ownership of industry -- was organized and achieved by someone who never held public office[7]

the "common law" developed over centuries based on many day-to-day judicial decisions, relying on logic, custom and precedent, and such law was considered better than a statute drafted by one or a few experts

the U.S. Constitution, in its prohibition on nobility and religious tests for office, its frequent elections of House members, and its term limitation on the president.

the Australian 2020 summit employed the best of the public by bringing together 1,000 people from all over Australia to discuss and make plans for the country's future.[8]

Musical examples

"Battle Hymn of the Republic," the only significant song by Julia Ward Howe, written in the dark during a pre-dawn inspiration

"I Can See Clearly Now," a massive one-hit wonder by Johnny Nash in 1972

"You Light Up My Life," the only hit by Debbie Boone, was a tribute to God that topped the charts for many weeks

"Sunshine" (1971), which was not only a one-hit wonder by Jonathan Edwards, but it was included in his album only because a preferred song had been accidentally erased.[9]

"Ice Ice Baby" was the "B-side" filler panned by "experts" which became a massive hit because a disc jockey played it by chance; allegedly written by Vanilla Ice when he was 16[10]

"96 Tears" by Question Mark and the Mysterians reached Number One on the charts, and overshadowed subsequent successes by the band.

a-ha produced the ground-breaking video and song "Take On Me", despite never charting again for singles, albums, or videos.

"In the Year 2525", by Zager and Evans, reached number one in both the United States and the United Kingdom. The group had no other Top 40 songs in either country, making them the only group to have this kind of "one-hit wonder" in both countries.

(add more one-hit wonders)

Military examples

Eddie Rickenbacker, who had to drop out of school at age 12 in order to support his mother after his father died, became the "American Ace of Aces" with 26 victories in World War I (despite being relatively old), survived on a life raft for 24 days after his plane went down in World War II (despite being over 50 years old), and later spoke out for conservative views; Rickenbacker, a phenomenal race-car driver when WWI broke out, was rejected for flying but then fixed Billy Mitchell's car and persuaded him to give Eddie a chance at aviation.[11]

Athletics

Anyone can enter, and winning is based solely on skill. Examples include the following:

Competitions

The Olympic Games,[12] known for setting the most world records. When Francois Duvalier was the dictator of Haiti, he decided to abandon common sense and instead use nepotism to select who would compete in the Olympics. High-ranking military officials were sent to represent Haiti regardless of athletic ability, and typically finished last. The International Olympic Committee has since taken steps to ensure all athletes are reasonably qualified, although they do make exceptions in the Summer Olympics for countries with no reasonably qualified athletes in any sport. Today, all countries send their best athletes, rather than use the methods Duvalier used.

Achievements

Arthur Ashe, son of a policeman, at the relatively old age of 31 crushed the nearly invincible 22-year-old Jimmy Connors in 1975 to become the only African American men's Wimbledon singles champion;[14] Ashe won this upset with an ingenuous strategy of using offspeed volleys unfamiliar to the hard-hitting Connors.

Dick Fosbury invented the Fosbury Flop despite criticism by all the experts. He won the 1968 Gold Medal with it, and now nearly everyone imitates his style.

Bob Beamon, an obscure 22-year-old long jumper who barely qualified for the 1968 Olympic finals after fouling out on most attempts, then broke the world record by nearly two feet. In the preceding 30 years, the world record for the long jump had increased by only about 8 inches.[15]

Marion Bartoli, a relatively obscure tennis player with a low seed at Wimbledon, won in 2013 without losing a single set the entire tournament, a feat achieved by only five other players in modern history.

An unsuccessful Olympian, the medical student Roger Bannister broke the 4-minute barrier for the mile, which some experts considered impossible; now the record is 3:43.

A little-known pitcher, Don Larsen, threw the only perfect game in World Series history (Game 5, 1956)

David, a boy of slight build, defeated the most feared warrior of all time, the mammoth Goliath

Kurt Warner, one of the greatest football quarterbacks,[16] was originally cut by the Green Bay Packers, denied a tryout by the Chicago Bears, and ultimately only given a chance due to another player's injury.

Tom Brady, arguably the best quarterback of all time,[17] was given a chance at the NFL only after the experts had chosen 198 other players ahead of him in the 2000 NFL draft. He got to play only when Drew Bledsoe, chosen first by the experts in the 1993 draft, was injured.

The Dallas Mavericks, having few stars, swept the heavily favored Los Angeles Lakers and then crushed the star-studded Miami Heat to win the 2011 NBA title.

Jeremy Lin, denied college basketball scholarships, left undrafted by the NBA and cut by a weak NBA team, joined the 8-15 Knicks and then took them on a seven-game winning streak, including wiping the floor with liberal-promoted Kobe Bryant of the favored Lakers

a very longshot underdog colt, ridden by a Kentucky Derby rookie, won the fabled race in an enormous upset in 2012.

Matt Cassel played backup quarterback to both Carson Palmer and Matt Leinart at the University of Southern California. Both Palmer and Leinart won the Heisman Trophy for best collegiate player, so Cassel never played for the Trojans except in blowouts. In 2005, he was drafted by the New England Patriots, only to back up Tom Brady when Brady was arguably the best quarterback in the league. In 2008, Brady suffered a season ending injury in the Patriots' first game, but Cassel led them to an 11-5 record, narrowly missing the playoffs. Since Brady had recovered by 2009, Cassel became the full-time starter on the Kansas City Chiefs, and was selected to the Pro Bowl following the 2010 season as one of the best quarterbacks in the AFC.

(add more)

Science and technology

the greatest river engineer ever, James B. Eads, lacked any formal education and his revolutionary successes (such as the Eads Bridge) were opposed by leading experts[18]

perhaps the greatest health program of the 20th century, using a new term he coined for his program ("aerobics"), was developed by military physician Kenneth Cooper outside of a major medical research facility

"Moldy" Mary Hunt, a low-level lab worker, used a rotten cantaloupe to facilitate the first mass production of penicillin.[19]

New astronomical discoveries are regularly reported by amateur astronomers, to then be published by "experts", advancing their careers in the process.

The leading and most innovative internet browser, Firefox, was developed in a not-for-profit effort outside of the multi-billion-dollar Microsoft and Google empires.

Mikhail Kalashnikov was drafted by the Russian military, and despite being trained in poetry and literature, eventually was made a firearms designer. He drew upon inspiration from Russian literature, and the Bible to focus on simplicity, and dependability. This simplicity resulted in the atheist experts rejecting his designs, and declaring them unworkable. The experts were however ultimately proven wrong, when one of his designs went on to win an open design contest, and became the single most reliable and prevalent firearm in the world: the AK-47.

In 1919, philanthropist Raymond Orteig offered $25,000 to the first person to fly a solo, non-stop flight between New York and Paris. Although many wealthy aviation experts attempted to win this prize, it was an unknown amateur pilot named Charles Lindbergh who won it.

Michael Faraday, a son of a poor blacksmith, had no formal education and became literate only in age thirteen. However, he discovered that magnetic fields could produce electricity, which no expert had attempted. Faraday later denied all patents, knighthood, and large funerals.

Finance

Studies show that the public does as good a job at picking good stock investments as the experts do. For example, stock market indexes typically outperform funds managed by experts.

Exploration and discovery

Despite billions of research dollars, technical experts and equipment for professional astronomers, amateur astronomers play a crucial role in outer space discoveries. See Comet Lovejoy

Christopher Columbus discovered the New World, despite near-unanimous expert opinion that his first voyage was doomed to failure. On his second voyage, he successfully returned to the same place he had previously reached, despite the limited navigational skills of the experts of the time.

Journalism

Large media outlets have begun presenting amateur reports from viewers. This began with CNN's iReport[21] and later was adopted by Fox News (uReport[22]) and others.

Law Enforcement

Alleged Boston Marathon bomber Dzhokhar Tsarnaev was caught, not by the thousands of police experts swarming uselessly over a shut-down Watertown, MA, but by an individual keeping his eyes open in his own back yard.

Obstacles Created by Liberal Experts

Liberal and Conservative experts have self-interest in defending their theories, even if incorrect, and in perpetuating the system that has rewarded and applauded them. Some experts receive prodigious sums by promoting theories that are false or implausible, either in the media or in courtrooms.

Most conservatives who are experts in their own right reasonably fear loss in grants, compensation or awards if they take a position at odds with a liberal counterpoint, especially one that has gained wide acceptance with the general population.

Examples

One expert said about the revolutionary design of the Eads bridge to transport heavy ships by railroad over the Mississippi River:[18]

The Best of the Public and the Invisible Hand

The concept of best of the public was first articulated on Conservapedia, although the effects have been observed by many great thinkers over the years. In a free society where the best of the public is allowed the latitude to excel, benefits accrue on many levels. Adam Smith, the father of capitalism, observed this principle in effect; in his book The Wealth of Nations, he described how the best of the public, when given the freedom to generate wealth, could generate a net beneficial and uplifting effect that goes beyond their individual enterprises. Smith called this the "Invisible Hand." However, he confined his observations to the sphere of economics, whereas the "Best of the Public" principle operates on many different levels.

Marriage and family, for example, serve as an illustration of the principle in the social arena. When marriage is allowed to function without government interference and misguided attempts at social engineering, the result is strong families; the best of the public raise children of superior virtue and character, who in turn grow up to pass those values on to their children. This, in turn, leads to a net positive effect on society known as the Invisible Hand of Marriage.

The same uplifting principle can be seen in any situation in which the best of the public is allowed to freely function and attain its potential. Events like the Olympics and the Tour de France permit the best of the public to strive on a physical level, resulting in many new record-breaking performances. While the principle has seldom (as of yet) been applied to academic endeavors, the Conservative Bible Project demonstrates the benefits that can result.

Opposition to the Best of the Public

Government restrictions

History demonstrates that the best of the public can only thrive in a free society. The cream cannot rise to the top if it is weighted down; eagles cannot soar if they are shackled by an oppressive government. This understanding is at the heart of conservative wisdom.

For example: it is only in a free market economy that the best of the public will be truly free to drive innovation, develop new technologies, and generate new wealth. In an overly-regulated economy, the incentive to excel is greatly reduced. Innovation is replaced by stagnation, and achievement by mediocrity.

Elite gatekeepers

Likewise, in an academic environment in which elite "experts" serve as gatekeepers, truly innovative research is frequently squelched in favor of orthodoxy and blind consensus. The chilling effect "scientific experts" can have on honest research was clearly demonstrated by the Climategate scandal. Even when such "experts" do not actively conspire to suppress dissent, their use of expertise and consensus as a bully pulpit can still silence opposing (and possibly correct) viewpoints.

Mobs

It is important to note the difference between "Best of the Public" and "mob rule." Simply allowing the loudest or most numerous voices to prevail is not the same thing as allowing the best of the public to drive achievement. Sites such as Wikipedia operate on the principle of mob rule, and as a result, are plagued with bias, inaccuracy, and an inability to differentiate between significant insights and trivia.

One of the most pointed illustrations of this difference is the United States itself. The Founding Fathers, despite not naming it, applied the "Best of the Public" principle in their attempts to craft a new government. Realizing the danger of mob rule, they rejected a pure democracy in favor of a democratic Republic--a system designed to ensure that, while all of the public would have a voice in their new government, the best of the public would guide that government. To insure that only the best of the public was selected, with the exception of members of the House of Representatives, officials in the federal government were not directly elected. The framers of the U.S. Constitution conceived of the Electoral College as a body of men who would exercise independent judgement in choosing the President and Vice President, not merely cast their ballots as directed by their state's voters. Moreover, electors in most states were initially appointed by state legislatures. Likewise, members of the Senate were originally selected by state legislatures. Judges, ambassadors and other federal officials are chosen by the President and subject to approval by the Senate. Thus, although the people would directly choose their Congressmen, they would only indirectly choose other officials, and this filtering mechanism would ensure that only the best of the public was in charge of the government, rather than having mob rule.

By choosing this compromise, they clearly affirmed that they believed the best of the public was better than a group of experts; in contrast, the nations of Europe still firmly subscribed to the notion that government should be in the hands of elite "experts" (the ruling families and nobility.)

Obscurity

The "best of the public" must be able to be heard. There are millions of books published, and even more books self-published without approval of traditional publishing houses. Many authors protest[24][25] that this is the greatest problem with modern publishing.

Experts versus the Best of the Public

Some confusion may exist over the difference between an "expert" and the "best of the public." The primary difference lies in the manner in which expertise is obtained. Most "experts" undergo highly specialized training, and in the process, become immersed in a sub-culture of like experts. This always carries the danger of groupthink and the pressure to conform. Also, academic credentialing consists almost entirely of repeating what professors say, rather than criticizing their errors.[26]

For instance, someone interested in obtaining a job in the field of climate science (whom we shall refer to as "Student A") would likely pursue a degree at an established university. In so doing, he would be immersed in the academic subculture of researchers and professors who have already obtained their degrees in that field. He would be subjected to their political views, preconceptions, and biases, and would likely find that these were presented as facts and as an integral part of the subject. Any questioning or dissent on his part might be harshly punished. Ultimately, he would be faced with a difficult choice: abandon his desire to be an accredited expert in that field, dishonestly pretend to believe in the questionable claims of his superiors, or convince himself that those claims were, in fact, the truth.

On the other hand, someone interested in learning about climate science, but not interested in becoming a credentialed expert (we'll call him "Student B,") would likely study a diverse variety of sources. Not confined to the insular and clannish academic subculture, he would speak with a wider range of people, and be exposed to a wider range of viewpoints. This would, in all probability, cause him to examine the claims of the experts with a more critical eye. Ultimately, his studies would not gain him a degree or the official imprimatur of the scientific community, but his understanding of climate science would very likely be more rounded and complete than that of Student A. He very well might disagree with the experts' point of view; at the very least, he would have a much better knowledge of its shortcomings.

A traditional, expert-dominated inquiry would dismiss the contributions of Student B, since he has not an "expert" - he has not received the official approval of the gatekeepers. A "best of the public" approach would accept the contributions of both Student A and Student B, since they are both members of the public. However, it would not place Student A's contributions on a pedestal and make them sacrosanct and immune to questioning. Student B would be free to bring in HIS expertise as well; as a result, the ensuing discussion would be much less one-sided and more comprehensive, and thus far more likely to result in accurate and truthful insights. Perhaps many ideas coming from people like Student B would be wrong, unprofitable, and therefore rightly rejected; the "best of the public" approach recognizes that not all ideas from the public are better than those of experts. However, it is very likely that some ideas from people like Student B will be true and helpful. This is the difference between the two approaches: such ideas will be heard under the "best of the public" method.

Solution of the Poincaré Conjecture

The solution to the Poincaré conjecture, one of the greatest unsolved math problems of the 20th century, was by the little-known Gregori Perelman who worked on his own and merely posted his solution on the internet. He had never been offered a permanent job and was critical of the lack of openness among mathematical experts as he described a rare exception:[27]

“

He actually told me a couple of things that he published a few years later. He did not hesitate to tell me. Hamilton's openness and generosity—it really attracted me. I can't say that most mathematicians act like that.

”

At great monetary sacrifice, Perelman refused to accept the awards conferred on him by experts after they eventually recognized the brilliance of his proof. A leading expert was accused of improperly trying to take credit for Perelman's work.

The Steklov Institute apparently declined to re-elect Perelman as a member in 2003, supposedly because the experts continued to doubt his proof. Reportedly Perelman has quit mathematics and was "jobless, living with his mother in St. Petersburg, and subsisting on her modest pension." He was quoted as saying:[28]

“

I can't say I'm outraged. Other people do worse. Of course, there are many mathematicians who are more or less honest. But almost all of them are conformists. They are more or less honest, but they tolerate those who are not honest. ... It is not people who break ethical standards who are regarded as aliens. It is people like me who are isolated.

”

In 2006, the mathematical establishment delivered another backhanded compliment to Perelman's achievement: he was awarded the Fields Medal on a shared basis with (1) an Obama-supporter who had jointly worked on a number theory problem, (2) a French mathematician-actor, and (3) a younger countryman who had achieved far less. This four-way split of the prize with far less significant achievements was inappropriate. Perelman declined this prize also.

↑"I wasn't a hero," Lenny Skutnik said. "I was just someone who helped another human being. We're surrounded by heroes. What made this different was that it was caught on film and went all over the world." [1]

↑here was a song on the album called ‘Please Find Me,’ and for some reason the engineer rolled over it. It got erased. We spent hours looking for it. We fired the engineer and put ‘Sunshine’ in its place.” [2]

↑"There's just something about the way its hook — a sample from Queen and David Bowie's Under Pressure — grabs you and flings you out onto the dance floor." [3]

↑"Then, in 1943, Mary Hunt, a lab worker in Peoria, Illinois brought in a cantaloupe melon. It was said to have been infected with a 'pretty, golden mould'. This mould was 'Penicillium chrysogeum'. It yielded about 200 times as much penicillin as Fleming's mould. Florey used x-rays to mutate the mould, which eventually gave 1000 times the yield of penicillin from the original." [4]